|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Apr 27, 2015 11:21:58 GMT -8
I know you can't trust anything Fabiani says but for what it's worth, he said the Chargers have no interest in moving in with Kroenke. According to him, they're all in on Carson if they can't get anything done in San Diego. Fibiani can spin things however he wants but even with the Raiders sharing the cost with the Spanoi, the chances of the Carson stadium being built are slim. Without the help of the Raiders, the chances of a Carson stadium being built are none. Therefore, if the Raiders manage to either get Oakland to commit to a new stadium - and word is the NFL is very desirous of seeing them stay in Oakland - or the Raiders move to St. Louis to replace the Rams, the Chargers' only option besides remaining in SD will be to become Kroenke's tenant.
|
|
|
Post by Luchador El Guerrero Azteca on Apr 27, 2015 11:32:54 GMT -8
I know you can't trust anything Fabiani says but for what it's worth, he said the Chargers have no interest in moving in with Kroenke. According to him, they're all in on Carson if they can't get anything done in San Diego. Fibiani can spin things however he wants but even with the Raiders sharing the cost with the Spanoi, the chances of the Carson stadium being built are slim. Without the help of the Raiders, the chances of a Carson stadium being built are none. Therefore, if the Raiders manage to either get Oakland to commit to a new stadium - and word is the NFL is very desirous of seeing them stay in Oakland - or the Raiders move to St. Louis to replace the Rams, the Chargers' only option besides remaining in SD will be to become Kroenke's tenant. Fibiani, I like it.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 27, 2015 11:53:54 GMT -8
I know you can't trust anything Fabiani says but for what it's worth, he said the Chargers have no interest in moving in with Kroenke. According to him, they're all in on Carson if they can't get anything done in San Diego. Fibiani can spin things however he wants but even with the Raiders sharing the cost with the Spanoi, the chances of the Carson stadium being built are slim. Without the help of the Raiders, the chances of a Carson stadium being built are none. Therefore, if the Raiders manage to either get Oakland to commit to a new stadium - and word is the NFL is very desirous of seeing them stay in Oakland - or the Raiders move to St. Louis to replace the Rams, the Chargers' only option besides remaining in SD will be to become Kroenke's tenant. Yet another option is to sell the franchise to someone with the money to build a stadium in another city, probably LA. The Spanos family would no doubt make a bundle. The question is this: Do they want to keep the Chargers as a pastime or are they in the NFL solely to make money? If the former, they will stay where they are (i.e., the Q) even if a new stadium is not built. By the way, if other franchises move to LA and the Chargers do not, and if the city shrugs its shoulders and says "no new stadium," the Chargers are cooked. Having once lost the chance to move and having stayed in the Q even so, the city would be foolish to try any more to build a new stadium. If the Chargers stayed once, why would they not stay forever? No need to give them a dime with the threat of moving having been proven to be hollow. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 27, 2015 12:01:47 GMT -8
Hmmm, I think it's very interesting that the NFL's President of Business Ventures thinks the most likely outcome from all this is that the Chargers will move to LA. You'd think he probably has a better feel for the moving pieces than anyone on this board does... I think he's just toting the company line to keep the leverage in LA's favor. I listened to his press conference when he was in town and it was a waste of 30 minutes and hardly said anything meaningful. The guy is just a puppet for Goodell.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 27, 2015 12:07:26 GMT -8
Hmmm, I think it's very interesting that the NFL's President of Business Ventures thinks the most likely outcome from all this is that the Chargers will move to LA. You'd think he probably has a better feel for the moving pieces than anyone on this board does... Roggin is an LA sports slappy. Grubman, the NFL guy made no such pronouncement. Days since LA last broke ground on a football stadium: 34,095 (93 years, 4 months, and 6 days)Well then I suppose the odds are in favor of it happening sooner rather than later.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 27, 2015 12:17:51 GMT -8
Fibiani can spin things however he wants but even with the Raiders sharing the cost with the Spanoi, the chances of the Carson stadium being built are slim. Without the help of the Raiders, the chances of a Carson stadium being built are none. Therefore, if the Raiders manage to either get Oakland to commit to a new stadium - and word is the NFL is very desirous of seeing them stay in Oakland - or the Raiders move to St. Louis to replace the Rams, the Chargers' only option besides remaining in SD will be to become Kroenke's tenant. Yet another option is to sell the franchise to someone with the money to build a stadium in another city, probably LA. The Spanos family would no doubt make a bundle. The question is this: Do they want to keep the Chargers as a pastime or are they in the NFL solely to make money? If the former, they will stay where they are (i.e., the Q) even if a new stadium is not built. By the way, if other franchises move to LA and the Chargers do not, and if the city shrugs its shoulders and says "no new stadium," the Chargers are cooked. Having once lost the chance to move and having stayed in the Q even so, the city would be foolish to try any more to build a new stadium. If the Chargers stayed once, why would they not stay forever? No need to give them a dime with the threat of moving having been proven to be hollow. AzWm Dean isn't going to sell the team. He wants his sons (John and AG) to take over, which they pretty much already have done. A few years ago there was a rumor part of the team was up for sale because of estate planning purposes. However Fabiani says they're now prepared for estate taxes when Alex Spanos passes away. But I don't trust anything Fabiani says. If they have to sell a portion of the team, I think it would be because of that.
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on Apr 27, 2015 12:27:13 GMT -8
Have we heard anything from SDSU about what SDSU will do if and when the Chargers "bolt" for LA? I'm not in the know like some of you folks! I will say this. No matter what happens SDSU football is not going away even if the Chargers do. This is a win-win situation for SDSU football. If the Chargers stay we get a new stadium (although not the best scenario for Aztec football). If the Chargers leave we will ultimately get a new stadium (best case scenario for SDSU). Obviously, I would prefer SDSU to build an Aztec specific college stadium along with a West Campus expansion. It is this scenario that is in the best long term interest of SDSU and the city of San Diego (unless there is a proposal that will allow for West Campus expansion @ the Q while also accomodating all the specific needs/wants of Aztec football in an NFL stadium - the Pitt/Steeler stadium experiment has been a failure in the opinion of the many students/fans/alumni). I have said this before. It would be foolish and premature for SDSU to appear to the public as anything more than a willing partner to work with all parties involved to find a long term stadium solution. SDSU is extremely well connected politically @ the city, county & state level and has far greater economic impact on San Diego County than the Chargers/NFL could possibly even dream of. Elliot Hirshman sums it up nicely. "From Los Angeles, we’re going to learn what everybody’s options are. We have a series of contingency plans,” he says, “What the options would be depends on how this game of musical chairs ends. We are considering multiple options, let’s just say that. They’re promising and haven’t been taken off the table.” "We can’t bring a lot of revenue to the ultimate solution,” Hirshman says. “What we can bring is strong support and 30,000 students, 6,000 faculty members and 300,000 alumni, 150,000 living in the immediate region. “It’s a tumultuous time for college football, with the Big Five conferences wanting to achieve the highest levels. This will be a challenge for us financially, but we will meet that challenge.” "The bad thing about talking to a university president is that you’re not the smartest person in the room. The good thing is that the smartest person in the room is talking to you. - N. Canepa" www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/mar/07/nick-canepa-sdsu-stadium/Only SDSU (and I suspect a handful of powerful & influential politicians, local leaders & businessmen) knows exactly what the contingency plans are and how they will be implemented. SDSU POLITICAL CONNECTIONS CA Senator Marty Block (Chairman of Senate Education Financing Subcommittee) - Former SDSU professor of 26 years CA Assembly Member Shirley Weber - Current SDSU Professor SD Mayor Kevin Faulconer - SDSU Alum SD County Supervisor Ron Roberts - SDSU Alum SD County Supervisor Greg Cox - SDSU Alum SD County Supervisor Dianne Jacob - SDSU Alum SD City Council Member David Alvarez - SDSU Alum Senator Marty Block has already proposed SDSU assume the property for a West Campus Expansion and new stadium when/if the Chargers leave. Watch this short video… www.kusi.com/story/28228281/senat...universityIn addition, John Moores (former MLB San Diego Padre owner and SDSU booster) and his development company, JMI, have been advocating that SDSU assume the property as well… "Also of interest to John Moores in particular is a non-economic issue that from our standpoint at JMI is that piece of property in Mission Valley is probably the only place in which San Diego State University can find any room to grow. And you look ahead 50 years from now; candidly it's probably more important that University's growth capacity is accommodated than which site is selected for the Chargers or what happens to a convention center when you look at the future of this community. And so we want to make sure the interest of San Diego State academically, educationally as well as their athletic program is accommodated." www.mighty1090.com/episode/dan-si...eve-peace/The Aztecs have a minimum of a FIVE year lease that is triggered when the Chargers depart. SDSU is closely connected to the city and county. The city/county is committed to working with SDSU when the Chargers depart. Skip to about the 4:45 mark for Jim Sterk's comments... m.youtube.com/watch?v=X6vDTRZHp9sSo, reading the hints and clues that have been made public by President Hirsman, Jim Sterk, Steve Peace/John Moores/JMI and Senator Marty Block I would conclude that SDSU is finalizing its contingency plans and is actively engaged on all fronts regarding SDSU's long term stadium options. When the Chargers leave that is when SDSU will go public with their plans. The only part of that diatribe that I would hang a hat on to keep SDSU FB going should the Chargers leave is JMI. None of the other players have done anything of significance IMO to warrant putting any faith into them. JMI on the other hand has the clout and bankroll to make a new SDSU stadium happen. Other than JMI I would not consider SDSU FB surviving a certainty. Then again, I am more pessimistic than some.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Apr 27, 2015 12:59:27 GMT -8
Hmmm, I think it's very interesting that the NFL's President of Business Ventures thinks the most likely outcome from all this is that the Chargers will move to LA. You'd think he probably has a better feel for the moving pieces than anyone on this board does... Roggin is an LA sports slappy. Grubman, the NFL guy made no such pronouncement. Days since LA last broke ground on a football stadium: 34,095 (93 years, 4 months, and 6 days)No need to rush into things.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 27, 2015 13:21:23 GMT -8
I will say this. No matter what happens SDSU football is not going away even if the Chargers do. This is a win-win situation for SDSU football. If the Chargers stay we get a new stadium (although not the best scenario for Aztec football). If the Chargers leave we will ultimately get a new stadium (best case scenario for SDSU). Obviously, I would prefer SDSU to build an Aztec specific college stadium along with a West Campus expansion. It is this scenario that is in the best long term interest of SDSU and the city of San Diego (unless there is a proposal that will allow for West Campus expansion @ the Q while also accomodating all the specific needs/wants of Aztec football in an NFL stadium - the Pitt/Steeler stadium experiment has been a failure in the opinion of the many students/fans/alumni). I have said this before. It would be foolish and premature for SDSU to appear to the public as anything more than a willing partner to work with all parties involved to find a long term stadium solution. SDSU is extremely well connected politically @ the city, county & state level and has far greater economic impact on San Diego County than the Chargers/NFL could possibly even dream of. Elliot Hirshman sums it up nicely. "From Los Angeles, we’re going to learn what everybody’s options are. We have a series of contingency plans,” he says, “What the options would be depends on how this game of musical chairs ends. We are considering multiple options, let’s just say that. They’re promising and haven’t been taken off the table.” "We can’t bring a lot of revenue to the ultimate solution,” Hirshman says. “What we can bring is strong support and 30,000 students, 6,000 faculty members and 300,000 alumni, 150,000 living in the immediate region. “It’s a tumultuous time for college football, with the Big Five conferences wanting to achieve the highest levels. This will be a challenge for us financially, but we will meet that challenge.” "The bad thing about talking to a university president is that you’re not the smartest person in the room. The good thing is that the smartest person in the room is talking to you. - N. Canepa" www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/mar/07/nick-canepa-sdsu-stadium/Only SDSU (and I suspect a handful of powerful & influential politicians, local leaders & businessmen) knows exactly what the contingency plans are and how they will be implemented. SDSU POLITICAL CONNECTIONS CA Senator Marty Block (Chairman of Senate Education Financing Subcommittee) - Former SDSU professor of 26 years CA Assembly Member Shirley Weber - Current SDSU Professor SD Mayor Kevin Faulconer - SDSU Alum SD County Supervisor Ron Roberts - SDSU Alum SD County Supervisor Greg Cox - SDSU Alum SD County Supervisor Dianne Jacob - SDSU Alum SD City Council Member David Alvarez - SDSU Alum Senator Marty Block has already proposed SDSU assume the property for a West Campus Expansion and new stadium when/if the Chargers leave. Watch this short video… www.kusi.com/story/28228281/senat...universityIn addition, John Moores (former MLB San Diego Padre owner and SDSU booster) and his development company, JMI, have been advocating that SDSU assume the property as well… "Also of interest to John Moores in particular is a non-economic issue that from our standpoint at JMI is that piece of property in Mission Valley is probably the only place in which San Diego State University can find any room to grow. And you look ahead 50 years from now; candidly it's probably more important that University's growth capacity is accommodated than which site is selected for the Chargers or what happens to a convention center when you look at the future of this community. And so we want to make sure the interest of San Diego State academically, educationally as well as their athletic program is accommodated." www.mighty1090.com/episode/dan-si...eve-peace/The Aztecs have a minimum of a FIVE year lease that is triggered when the Chargers depart. SDSU is closely connected to the city and county. The city/county is committed to working with SDSU when the Chargers depart. Skip to about the 4:45 mark for Jim Sterk's comments... m.youtube.com/watch?v=X6vDTRZHp9sSo, reading the hints and clues that have been made public by President Hirsman, Jim Sterk, Steve Peace/John Moores/JMI and Senator Marty Block I would conclude that SDSU is finalizing its contingency plans and is actively engaged on all fronts regarding SDSU's long term stadium options. When the Chargers leave that is when SDSU will go public with their plans. The only part of that diatribe that I would hang a hat on to keep SDSU FB going should the Chargers leave is JMI. None of the other players have done anything of significance IMO to warrant putting any faith into them. JMI on the other hand has the clout and bankroll to make a new SDSU stadium happen. Other than JMI I would not consider SDSU FB surviving a certainty. Then again, I am more pessimistic than some. I wouldn't consider what I wrote a diatribe. Hardly. Just simply the facts and events that have unfolded thus far.
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on Apr 27, 2015 14:21:02 GMT -8
The only part of that diatribe that I would hang a hat on to keep SDSU FB going should the Chargers leave is JMI. None of the other players have done anything of significance IMO to warrant putting any faith into them. JMI on the other hand has the clout and bankroll to make a new SDSU stadium happen. Other than JMI I would not consider SDSU FB surviving a certainty. Then again, I am more pessimistic than some. I wouldn't consider what I wrote a diatribe. Hardly. Just simply the facts and events that have unfolded thus far. Fair enough. Probably a bit of an overstatement to refer to it as a diatribe. My ill stated effort was to point out how voluminous your post was. And certainly it was not meant to denigrate it either. I see how my poor word choice indicated just that. My apologies.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 27, 2015 15:02:12 GMT -8
I wouldn't consider what I wrote a diatribe. Hardly. Just simply the facts and events that have unfolded thus far. Fair enough. Probably a bit of an overstatement to refer to it as a diatribe. My ill stated effort was to point out how voluminous your post was. And certainly it was not meant to denigrate it either. I see how my poor word choice indicated just that. My apologies. I just wanted to put in words/print/post what has happened as it relates to SDSU. Many feel SDSU has not said much. That is true. However, what they have said is to the point. SDSU is certainly not tap dancing around leaving you to wonder if they are telling the truth or not like the Chargers/NFL are. SDSU is in "wait and see" mode because the main players in this dance are the city/county and the NFL/Chargers. In about 3 weeks we should have a much better idea of what the actions of all parties involved will be.
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Apr 27, 2015 19:07:09 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2015 20:25:59 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 27, 2015 20:26:52 GMT -8
I don't think anyone thinks the Carson deal is very solid. Doesn't mean it won't happen. IMO this is what might happen… Rams to LA Raiders to Levi Stadium or St. Louis Chargers to share with Rams or go to St. Louis … or Rams actually stay in St. Louis which gives both Oakland and San Diego more time to get taken to the cleaners by the NFL and their respective teams. … or the Rams stay in St. Louis and neither the Chargers or Raiders get stadiums in their cities and somehow make Carson work. … But I think most likely is Rams to LA sharing with the Chargers and the Raiders to St. Louis or sharing @ Levi with the 49ers. There is a reason why both the 49er and Kroenke stadiums are/will be designed to house two teams.
|
|
|
Post by fredgarvinmp on Apr 27, 2015 21:22:07 GMT -8
Book it!
Rams back to LA Chargers will stay in SD Raiders stay in Oak STL will get struggling franchise relocation in 5-10 years (most likely JAX)
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 27, 2015 21:23:40 GMT -8
I don't think anyone thinks the Carson deal is very solid. Doesn't mean it won't happen. IMO this is what might happen… Rams to LA Raiders to Levi Stadium or St. Louis Chargers to share with Rams or go to St. Louis … or Rams actually stay in St. Louis which gives both Oakland and San Diego more time to get taken to the cleaners by the NFL and their respective teams. … or the Rams stay in St. Louis and neither the Chargers or Raiders get stadiums in their cities and somehow make Carson work. … But I think most likely is Rams to LA sharing with the Chargers and the Raiders to St. Louis or sharing @ Levi with the 49ers. There is a reason why both the 49er and Kroenke stadiums are/will be designed to house two teams.The reason is to keep the threat of another team moving in, which will likely be used if Carson fails. Kroenke isn't going to share his stadium and the LA market with anyone. Why would he?
|
|
|
Post by fredgarvinmp on Apr 27, 2015 21:29:35 GMT -8
I don't think anyone thinks the Carson deal is very solid. Doesn't mean it won't happen. IMO this is what might happen… Rams to LA Raiders to Levi Stadium or St. Louis Chargers to share with Rams or go to St. Louis … or Rams actually stay in St. Louis which gives both Oakland and San Diego more time to get taken to the cleaners by the NFL and their respective teams. … or the Rams stay in St. Louis and neither the Chargers or Raiders get stadiums in their cities and somehow make Carson work. … But I think most likely is Rams to LA sharing with the Chargers and the Raiders to St. Louis or sharing @ Levi with the 49ers. There is a reason why both the 49er and Kroenke stadiums are/will be designed to house two teams.The reason is to keep the threat of another team moving in, which will likely be used if Carson fails. Kroenke isn't going to share his stadium and the LA market with anyone. Why would he?I agree Kroenke is NOT going to share his stadium. The move to alter his plan is simply a PR move to gain support for his plan from owners who might not be happy with how he has gone about his move.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 27, 2015 21:45:40 GMT -8
I don't think anyone thinks the Carson deal is very solid. Doesn't mean it won't happen. IMO this is what might happen… Rams to LA Raiders to Levi Stadium or St. Louis Chargers to share with Rams or go to St. Louis … or Rams actually stay in St. Louis which gives both Oakland and San Diego more time to get taken to the cleaners by the NFL and their respective teams. … or the Rams stay in St. Louis and neither the Chargers or Raiders get stadiums in their cities and somehow make Carson work. … But I think most likely is Rams to LA sharing with the Chargers and the Raiders to St. Louis or sharing @ Levi with the 49ers. There is a reason why both the 49er and Kroenke stadiums are/will be designed to house two teams.The reason is to keep the threat of another team moving in, which will likely be used if Carson fails. Kroenke isn't going to share his stadium and the LA market with anyone. Why would he? So what do the Chargers do when no stadium gets built in San Diego?
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Apr 27, 2015 21:51:48 GMT -8
as long as the Raiders are in Oakland and the Chargers are in San Diego ... the threat of a move to Levi or Inglewood only exists for Oakland and San Diego -- no other team would be allowed to saturate the Northern or Southern California markets as the NFL has declared a 2 team limit in each.
Not sure who has the leverage in stadium negotiations between the Chargers and San Diego, but it would appear to be back to square 1 -- with the Chargers either having to be a willing partner in San Diego or moving to LA and being a tenant in Kroenkeville.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Apr 27, 2015 22:54:37 GMT -8
The reason is to keep the threat of another team moving in, which will likely be used if Carson fails. Kroenke isn't going to share his stadium and the LA market with anyone. Why would he? So what do the Chargers do when no stadium gets built in San Diego? If all efforts fail here, I think their only option is to get St Louis to build them a stadium. People are saying Jerry Jones will block a move to San Antonio. I haven't heard of any other cities that are trying to lure a team. Maybe they just keep playing in the Q until it literally crumbles to the ground, lol. It would be difficult for them to move anywhere though because teams that relocate aren't eligible for the NFL G4 funding and would St. Louis really support the Chargers? Maybe they'd be more accepting than LA but it doesn't sound like a promising move. The most logical solution is to just stay put in San Diego.
|
|